Article Type : Review Article
Authors : Buxado JA
Keywords : Art; Documentation; Painting; Provenance; Research; Aesthetic
A comparison between pictorial styles of the Cuban
painters Michel Mico and his father Fidel Mico is presented in this article.
The transformation process of the knowledge and feelings assimilated by Michel
from his father into a personal style was drawn from visual analysis of their
paintings. Differences and similarities found in visual impact, composition,
focus, visual pathway, arrangement of the third dimension, size, frame
orientation, mass and form separation, and light suggest a deep influence of Fidel
in the evolution of Michel’s style. Results and its corresponding
interpretations reported here could be of interest for scholars currently
investigating the evolution of the contemporary Cuban art.
The altruistic attitude of the Cuban painter Fidel
Mico (b. 1962) for teaching to young artists is one of the most notable
features of his personality, in spite of that he spontaneously emerged without
sufficient support to develop talent [1,2]. The influence of this artist in the
career of tenths of Cuban painters could be a formidable research subject, but
comparisons between works of Fidel Mico and his son Michel Mico, born in 1983
could also be a contribution for understanding the heterogeneous evolution of
the contemporary Cuban art (CCA) [3]. The natural wit showed by Fidel from 10
years old was probably transferred to Michel from childhood although there is
not graphical evidence supporting this assumption. By 2004, Michel started
formal training at the Academy of Fine Art “San Alejandro” after three years of
training in local studios and group exhibitions in Galeria Hernandez Cardenas,
and Casa Museo Huron Azul (Havana). A project on the Michel’s career has
recently been started, but there is not even enough information to complete
deep analysis, writing, and publication dealing with his career. The primary
aim of this work is to find convergences and divergences in oil on canvas
painted by Fidel and Michel by comparisons between individual artworks in the
hope to open a pathway for studying the evolution of the CCA. The study of the
Bruegel’s family is an example of useful information for understanding this
interesting genealogical process, but a defined methodology for studying the
influence of a painter in the career of other artists has not been found in the
literature. Therefore, a rational idea could be performing independent visual
analysis of artworks painted by a progenitor and his/her offspring. In
addition, it could be taken for granted that comparing compositions containing
similar elements will improve accuracy and certainty of the visual analysis. In
this work, the author reports comparisons between landscapes painted by Fidel
Mico and Michel Mico as a point of departure to study transference of pictorial
ability and aesthetic precepts from a father to his descendant.
Jose
A. Buxadó (JAB): When did you start painting?
Michel
Mico (MM): First, I started drawing when I was 6
years old by using pencil, like any child. I drew landscapes with volcanoes and
dinosaurs which fascinated me. Obviously, I was born in an environment plenty
of artistic creativity looking to my father from the beginning to the end of
every canvas. I enjoyed a childhood with spontaneous creativity that I stopped
at 11 and restated at 15 years old. My serous works of paintings started when I
was 19 years old.
JAB:
Did your childhood influence in your vocation? I mean your decision to be a
professional painter.
MM:
Definitively, it did. I had two periods of obsessive intensity of drawing
during childhood to the point to know the scientific name of each dinosaur
species. I was actually fascinated by the world of those kings which governed
earth for millions of years, and I did not want to do anything that were not
reproducing their majestic designs and colossal fighting for survival. At
present, I think that I own my talent to my difficulties to express ideas and
feelings through words during my childhood. Maybe I developed more visual
capacities than linguistic abilities during my childhood walking between my
father’s paintings. It was good to feel how a limitation may become into a
source of talent.
JAB:
Who were the most influential persons in your decision to be a painter?
MM:
I think that the most influential factor was tradition, but my family was also
important. My grandmother worked as drawer, and my father is a professional
painter. It is important to note that my father has been the most influential
person in my career. He has been inspiration and a great challenge. He is
always stimulating me to be better than him, which I am not sure that will
happen. Debate with my father on every painting has been a dominant factor in
the evolution of my pictorial style. Our professional confrontations remains in
my mind: he asked me to add more details to my paintings, but our visions on
realism were not the same, and I told him that the worst thing that happened to
me was to be the son of a painter. Fortunately, I do not think like that
anymore. At present, he is my best accomplice, and the hardest judge. His
requirements have been fruitful.
JAB:
Do you like the contemporary Cuban painting?
MM:
Yes, I do. There are many young talents in the current generation of painters
who are exploring the work of the old masters, particularly concerning to the
legacy of Giotto di Bondone (1267 - 1337), and Michelangelo Buonarroti (1475 -
1564). I think that they are discovering themselves. I mean their actual nature
as offspring of Spanish, African, and Chinese people. Probably, future
generations will be unable to abandon the essential issues of the old cannon of
aesthetics. I feel that the youngest Cuban painters are more eclectic than previous
generations, because they open space for more genres, and concepts. In
addition, they have been receiving much more visual information from any part
of the world, and there is a traditional capacity in this society to understand
different cultures. In intellectual terms, the youngest painters are better
than previous generations.
JAB:
Now, talking about your personal style, do you think that it has been
influenced by any artist?
MM:
Yes, it is. My personal style has been influenced by the work of Ivan Ivanovich
Shishkins (1832 - 1898), and my father, although I continue in a constant
search, because I do not think that I have a definitive style. Shishkin’s work
made me to believe in realism when I studied his Catalogue Raisonne. I think
that he showed the beauty of nature as no one is able to do it. Chapters could
be written on any of his paintings. There is too much to learn from his legacy.
JAB:
I know that your paintings were shown at the group exhibition 170th Anniversary
of the birth of Esteban Chartrand y Dubois (1840 – 1882) in 2010 at the Church
“San Francisco de Asis” (Havana, Cuba). What did call your attention in that
exhibition?
MM:
There are many interesting issues in the work of Chartrand: mostly, the use of
light, shadow, and contrast. Concerning to the exhibition, I just can say that
the place was what I always dreamed for showing my paintings. Unfortunately, I
have not the encyclopedic knowledge and qualification to describe that
building. The mystic environment of that spiritual enclosure was the most
impressive feature at the exhibition. It is a very ancient small church. It was
incredible the excellence in the use of space. The curatorial work was
exquisite. This old master deserves our veneration in a place like that.
JAB:
I have been studying the work of your father during 8 years, and you have been
up-to-date on my work. Would you accept participating in a research project for
documenting your work?
MM:
Yes, of course. I would accept it, because I want to be known in other
countries, and learning from other painters.
JAB:
I have observed that your work has been diverse. Have you considered additional
expansion to other genres?
MM:
Yes, I have thought it. Actually, I feel a need to do it.
JAB:
Can you describe your painting process?
MM:
Actually, my painting process is not standard. I am highly variable concerning
to the painting process. I am not stable in that issue. I use different work
flows and resources, looking for my purpose of painting. I have not an exact
sequence to say.
JAB:
What did you feel after entering to the National Academy of Fine Art “San
Alejandro” to study painting?
MM:
The academy is a place where students feel a peculiar artistic environment. We
felt a continue creation process. It is a wonderful place, in this sense. In
fact, I was excited when I entered to the academy for the first time. Later,
after several months studying, I felt that I was losing my time. Why? Because
professors were teaching me what I just knew, and it was like learning the same
lessons twice. I felt a need to be free, but I visualized some aesthetic
dogmas, and that was not what I wanted. I am a very independent person.
JAB:
Do you remember a professor that influenced in your pictorial style?
MM:
There was not a professor that influenced in my personal style at the academy.
JAB:
What artists from your generation could be considered important?
MM:
I do not see anyone, including me, until now. Someone important is who makes
contributions that changes concepts in the pictorial art.
JAB:
Where you have shown works in exhibition?
MM:
The first one was at the Gallery “HerCar”. I showed at “San Fancisco de Asis”,
as you mentioned before, and another at the Hotel “Parque Central”. These have
been the most important for me.
JAB:
What countries would you like to visit?
MM:
First, I would like to visit Australia. I would also like to visit Russia,
Germany, Greece, and the United State, mostly New Orleans where I knew, through
friends living there, that there is a strong cultural movement.
JAB:
What foreign painter would you like to know?
MM:
There is a German painter, but I do not remember his name now. I would also
like to have known the Polish painter Zdzis?aw Beksinski (1929 - 2005) who
tragically died. I knew about his work through a film dealing with part of his
stormy life. The Beksinski’s oeuvre has been the most impressive to me.
JAB:
Do you feel part of a national tradition?
MM:
Yes, I do, because I work on landscape painting, because this is my country,
and because what I see every day in this island.
JAB:
Are you interested in the work of any contemporary painter?
MM:
At present, I am not interested in the study of any contemporary painter.
JAB:
Do you paint at any specific time of the day?
MM:
I was working exclusively at night during a long period of time, but I found
that I did not get what I wanted. It was good, because there was silence, but I
have organized my work, and at present I take advantage of the sun light which
is more important to me, and I rest at night.
JAB:
Are you able to work in absence natural light?
MM:
Yes, I can do it.
JAB:
What is the importance of the drawing in your work?
MM:
It is very important. Drawing gives more coherence to artworks. If you have a
good drawing, you can do a better work, but actually I have not a defined order
when I start a painting. Sometimes I start directly painting “a la prima”,
without drawing. I do not need drawing when I paint landscapes.
JAB:
Have art market requirements affected the evolution of your work?
MM:
Of course, and it makes a huge pressure on every artist at global scale.
JAB:
Would you prefer to be known through advertising or through peer-reviewed
publications?
MM:
The second alternative would be idyllic. It is the most trustable and serious,
but I will not reject any opportunity.
JAB:
Which subjects are you more interested to represent in your artworks?
MM:
At present, landscape is the most important to me, because I have not been able
to paint a landscape as I really would like do it. The nude also attracts me,
because of the diversity of ethnic groups coexisting in my country, and their
offspring, but at present, I am consecrated to landscape.
JAB:
Do you think more on the visual impact or are you more interested in
transmitting a message to the viewer?
MM:
I am more interested in the visual impact.
JAB:
What painters you have studied in depth?
MM:
First, I studied to Michelangelo Buonarroti, and later to Ivan Shishkins. I
have also studied too much the work of the British illustrator Simon Bisley (b.
1962), although he is not a painter. His comics are highly pictorial. He is the
only artist of comics that is interesting to me.
JAB:
It is almost unavoidable to think on comparisons between artworks of Fidel Mico
and yours. Does it have affected you?
MM:
Comparisons between ours artworks only affected me during adolescence when I
felt the need to develop a personal style, and to avoid being an exact copy of
my father. At present, this feeling has gone, because my work has changed to
move far away from my father’s work.
JAB:
How do you build the third dimension in your paintings?
MM:
I try to use a combination of light and color, but I think light is very
important. One of them has not sense without the other.
JAB: What are you doing to inform on your work?
MM: At present, I am doing nothing specific on this issue. However, the Australian photographer Robert William Grove, and the journalist Anne Pavey Grove have been active in their country reporting on my work, and the work of my father. This is a field that I want to open, because I have too much to say to the world.
Fidel Mico is one of a few contemporary Cuban painters who recently escaped from invisibility through documentation and publication of his work. Persistent interactions with the work of Michel Mico have been almost unavoidable while working in the project Fidel Mico Catalogue Raisonne (FMCR). Transfer of love for painting and artistic abilities to his son, and transformation of Fidel’s knowledge and feeling into Michel’s style were always floating at the studio. In a wider sense, a detailed review of exhibition catalogues at Fidel’s studio allowed finding coexistence of several generations of painters working in the same genre, and genre combinations. A small sample of the paintings showed at the group exhibition “Primer Salon Nacional de Paisaje Víctor Manuel” in 2003 is evidence in favor of the argument on the healthy and rich evolution of the CCA. The artworks showed at the monastery “San Francisco de Asis” by the Cuban painters Lester Campa Melo, Ramon Vázquez León, Diego Torres Rodríguez, and Omar Torres López were featured by the curator Jorge R. Bermudez in a single statement: “The empty criterion on the mimetic vision of reality to be molded as landscape, generally sweeten and asynchronous with the dominant taste, did not prevail”. A similar trend was clear seven years later at the group exhibition organized for celebration of the 170th birthday of the Cuban painter Esteban Chartrand y Dubois 1840-1882. In reference to the paintings showed this time at the monastery, curators wrote: “The contemporary significant presence (impronta) includes novel interests in this genre evidenced in realist, conceptual, surrealist or expressionist approaches.”
Comparisons of Fidel’s artworks with those painted by Michel, by using a comprehensive check list built from the literature for visual analysis, to discover how both artists represent the three-dimensional world on a two-dimensional surface, revealed evidence of a spontaneous evolution process in Michel’s work [4-9]. The author found at least eight paintings useful for comparison showing direct influence of Fidel in the work of his son (Table 1)
The paintings Camino al bohio Nº 1, and La Campina
seem to be the best examples for comparison between Fidel and his son, because
both works are almost identical. Michel reinforced the visual impact from the
foreground to the middle ground, and reduced the protagonist role of clouds. Although
Michel kept the same visual pathway, he changed the focus from clouds to the
trees behind the house in the middle ground spreading the sight to left and
right, reinforcing the viewer’s attention to the painting. A more careful
construction of the third dimension and a release of the middle ground pressure
on the viewer are immediately perceptible in the work painted by Michel. His
work evidences of his father’s capacity to transfer feelings, and stimulating
creative freedom in other artists to obtain more advantageous conditions of
light and environment. This was repeatedly confirmed during visits of the
author to the studio. A comparison between Atardecer en la Sierra, and Bruma is
a little more difficult, but some relevant conclusions may be drawn. In both
works, with equal size, a river crosses the painted place suggesting the same
visual pathway in both paintings, but once again Michel introduced his personal
style by removing trees from the foreground in the right compartment and
including two palms and small mountains in the middle ground. An ancient
fundamental concept on the novelty of a painting could have being part of the
creative process when Michel painted Bruma. Nicolas Poussin (1594 - 1665)
remarked that: “The novelty in painting does not consist principally in a new
subject, but in new and good disposition and expression, and thus the subject
from being common and old becomes singular and new” [10]. Michel used a more
sophisticated method for holding the viewer’s attention. The sight is trapped
between small mountains, the sunset, and three palms placed in the left
compartment. He also reinforced separation between mass and form, possibly for
preventing confusion of identity. Contours of forms within groups are equally
interesting, although different, in both works. In a lower key, Michel
discarded warm colors, and used a wide range of grey and green to represent a
wetter and colder environment. The treatment of a river flowing from the
foreground in the painting Camino de luz may deserve a deep study if compare
with the painting Espejo del monte. Obviously, both artists disagreed not only
on the size, but also on the more pertinent frame orientation to emphasize the
subject. The visual impact suggests that Michel found the opportunity to show a
different perception of the same scenario by including an almost infinite
amount of details from the foreground to the background, avoiding element
simplifications, and reducing the protagonist role of the river. Michel
enlarged the visual pathway, as did in La Campina, leaving the viewer attention
floating between both sides of the river and the foreground of the painted
place. The arrangement of lines becomes more interesting in Camino de luz where
beauty of the tropical landscape is highlighted in every detail by introducing
more diversity of line, spacing, tone, and color. Concerning to logic
development of light, the influence of Fidel in the work of Michel seems to
have been limited in a landscape with abundant vegetation and stones. Other relevant
issue is the absence of element projections between compartments in the work of
Michel. The painting El salto de la paloma is one of the works commissioned to
Fidel by an USA private collector in 2006, and showed in exhibition at the 48th
Annual Coconuts Grove Arts Festival in February 2011 [11]. The visual impact of
this painting suggests a great effort to obtain perfection in every detail. The
focus is placed according to a relationship with lines and forms for guiding
the sight to the principal element: a waterfall. However, Michel did not face
this huge challenge, because the attention centre is wider in the painting
Donde todo comienza. In this painting, the viewer is free to enjoy biodiversity
into an intimate scenario plenty of species and natural interactions. A complex
ecosystem is directly represented by Michel where, on the contrary, the
waterfall is not the principal element. Light plays different roles in these
paintings. Fidel fully enlightened the scenario, and Michel regulated light
intensity from the middle ground to suggest humidity introduced by the
waterfall in a small space limited by a stone wall and shadows of highly
entangled and compact vegetation. In El salto de la paloma, Fidel granted major
protagonist role to water flowing around stones from the background in an open
space, but Michel seems to have been more interested in the environment
generated by the aesthetic synergy of compositional elements.
Most characteristics of the work of Fidel Mico could
be divided into two categories. The first one suggests the possibility of the
influence from impressionists, a Russian old master, and Cuban landscape
painters from the 19th century. A second category could be components of a
personal style developed during 40 years. Michel, on the other hand, is more
difficult to analyze, because he is building a personal style, apparently at
random, from the study of all known genres, painting landscapes, portraits,
still lifes, abstractions, and an extensive diversity of genre combinations.
The Sir Joshua Reynolds’ reference to William Shakespeare (1564 - 1616) as
“that faithful and accurate painter of nature” (Reynolds 1778), and the famous
aphorism of Simonides de Ceos (556 b. C – 468 b. C): “painting is mute poetry,
poetry a speaking picture” could be discussed in this study case [12]. The
argument: “persistence on landscape genre, crossing and breathing modern times,
emerging with fresh, and up-to-date visions, keeping fidelity to traditions,
with modern eyes” is supported by Fidel’s brotherhood with the spirits of
forerunner masters who kindly accept moving his hands, feeding his imagination
and soul. He works with an exceptional vision, and Caribbean feeling, to reach
actual, but at the same time, dreamlike images. Some of his paintings teach on
the spirituality, containing a remarkable devotion to symbolic representations
[13,14], but Michel has taken a radically different pathway. If attention is
paid to his virtual gallery at the website ArtsCad it would be easy to
understand the intensity of Michel’s current exploration in the pictorial art.
The still life paintings Bailarinas and El rey y sus ovejas are good examples
of the time spent by him looking for perfection in a particular genre [15-17].
Certainly, an individual style will derive from these efforts, but it remains
to see how much it differs from his father’s style. In many Fidel’s paintings,
the principal element is a small mass of light irradiating the landscape,
introducing serious doubts on the formal correspondence between poetry and
painting. Although this particular challenge has not been faced by Michel, he
has obtained satisfactory results facing other complex tasks, suggesting a
remarkable interest in poetic messages and rejection to exact imitation of
nature. Devotion for finding perfection has also been observed in the
abundance, and diversity of vegetation painted by both artists provoking that
the viewer feels him-self as to be in the painted place. In most landscapes,
details are not simplified, but highlighted for unfolding Cuba’s beauty. The
presence of more than one landscape within a canvas is perceptible in Fidel’s
paintings, but it is timidly found in the work of Michel. He is creating his
own style for using acute angles as compositional elements of balance, for
building careful constructions of the third dimension and three dimensional
arraignments that release the visual pressure on the viewer. It seems to be
reasonable taking into account an advice of Leonardo Da Vinci (1452 – 1519) to
painters: “to be solitary and consider what he sees and discuss with himself,
choosing the most excellent parts of the species of whatever he sees. If he
does this, he will appear to be a second nature” [5]. The evolution of
technical issues of Michel’s work may be qualified as outstanding, but the
emotional side of painting remains to be developed at large. Human capacity to
perceive reality is very limited, but Fidel allows nature to penetrate his
artwork as he becomes absorbed in the creation process. His perception of nature
seems not to be limited to what he sees, but he also discuss with himself.
Color, fragrance, light, feeling, and infinite pleasures flow through every
exposed nerve when someone discovers his canvas in exhibition or at the studio.
The viewer is trapped by a kind of sweet energy which provokes a slight
repentance after a movement that makes losing one of thousands of perfect
angles which once again offer additional endless streams of unavoidable
spiritual pleasures. Obviously, obtaining these results from the viewer
requires decades of inquisitive devotion to the pictorial art. Both painters,
but particularly Fidel, work as if they were aware of the redefinition written
by Ludovico Dolce: “the painter must labor hard not only to imitate but also to
surpass nature” [18]. Decoding a color language that is almost ubiquitous in
every small detail of Fidel’s painting is a challenging, and maybe a
prohibitive task. Tropical trees, rivers and natural paths invite to visit
unknown and very intriguing places through an innocent interrogation: “what is
behind that..?” leaving the viewer in absolute levitation over infinite
alternatives of natural scenarios “… behind that…” His diagonal transit from
light blue to green, and then to dark green with intermediary well balanced
shadows is a test for human thinking at the limits of rationality. A passionate
interest on nature and consequences of environment destruction is evident from
his open speech to the world, emphasizing the rights of future inhabitants to
live in a healthy planet. Fidel places the most relevant natural features at
first plane, giving us a smooth intensity of the symbols that should be saved
by the humankind. Although the above mention features are not evident in the
work of Michel Mico, paintings of both artists demonstrates exquisite care of
light, color, line, and shape. They gradually unfold space in-depth from the
background opposing their own pictorial solutions to the traditional conception
of landscape painting. One may, in fact, go so far to say that there is a
useful precedent to understand developmental processes in a family of painters.
The study of artist families may be a source of knowledge on the evolution of
pictorial movements relevant for the History of Art. For instance, the
Bruegel’s dynasty was a remarkable case where sons and grandsons of a great
master were painters [19,20]. It is important to note that learning processes
may differ from a family to another. In this particular case, Jan Brueghel
(1568-1625), and his brother learned nothing directly from his father Pieter
Bruegel the Elder (1525-1569), because they were children when he died.
However, unlike his brother Pieter Brueghel the Younger (1564-1638), Jan
developed original style and repertoire of compositional elements and scenarios.
A direct continuation of the legacy from Jan to his descendants could be
expected, but it was not straightforward. While Jan’s linage of painters was
interrupted during one generation, Pieter’s sons Jan Brueghel the Younger
(1601-1678), and Ambrosius Brueghel (1617-1675) and his grandsons Jan Pieter
Brueghel (1628-1664) and Abraham Brueghel (1631-1690) were the outstanding
artists that kept alive the tradition and excellence of the family. Changes of
composition details, imitations, omissions, derived compositions,
misattributions, inventions and variations on subjects have been the starting
points not only to study the Bruegel’s dynasty, but also to find explanations
on the life and career of Dutch/Flemish painters from 16th to 17th century.
The method followed in this work for studying the
style evolution of the artist Michel Mico from the influence of his father
could be effective for investigating other artists and pictorial movements.
Differences found from comparisons of similar paintings were remarkable,
contributing to facilitate understanding the extension and dynamics of changes
in the CCA. The evolution reported in this work is ongoing, because Michel Mico
is even building his personal style. Although significant efforts for finding
perfection were observed in Michel’s paintings, the wide range of genres and
genre combinations faced by him makes difficult a reasonable forecasting of his
future directions and outcomes. Some challenges have not been faced by Michel
while he obtains the best from his father, but devotion has been demonstrated
in others. This is clear evidence of the alternative pathways that may take any
artist during career development, and a confirmation of Michel capacity to find
novel pictorial solutions from his individual aesthetic precepts. I submit that
the above-mentioned research serves as a contribution to the study of the
evolution of other artistic movements.
The author has no competing interests to declare.
Jose A. Buxado (b. 1965, Havana, Cuba) is an
independent scholar and writer. A graduate of Havana University and holding a
Master in Science, Buxado is currently collecting and analyzing information to
complete “The Fidel Mico Catalogue Raisonne”. He has submitted this project to
Catalogue Raisonne Scholars Association, and International Foundation for Art
Research. His research interests include ambidextrous painters, blind painters,
landscape painting, appraisal and valuation of artworks, and art-market interactions.
His professional career spans more than twenty five years in the fields of
science, technology, and business, but he has started research on visual art
after a visit to the studio of the ambidextrous painter Fidel Mico, and
informal meetings with artists of the pictorial movement known as “Horizontes”.